Let’s Regain Our Right to Vote

If someone came to you and said that your right to vote had been taken away, you probably would be very upset and perhaps start marching in the streets. Yet in 1977, the mayor of Los Angeles and the City Council did just that, and until last year no one said a word.

On Dec. 4, Assemblyman Tom McClintock (R-Northridge), at the urging of Valley VOTE, a grass-roots San Fernando Valley organization, introduced a bill that would restore that right to vote to citizens living in Los Angeles and other California cities and correct a wrong of 20 years duration.

*

In 1977, the mayor and City Council went to the state Legislature and lobbied for changing the process by which a portion of a city could detach. The law that was enacted took away the rights of citizens.

Before 1977, a difficult and comprehensive process was in place, under state law, that allowed part of a city to break away. People living in that part had to gain a substantial number--20%--of registered voters’ signatures to qualify the issue to be reviewed. (Given the Valley’s current population, that 20% would amount to about 130,000 signatures, by itself a substantial hurdle to cross.)

Then before any vote could be held, the proposed detachment had to be approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission, or LAFCO.

It is LAFCO’s obligation--now as well as in 1977--to review the economic and environmental effects of possible detachment of part of a city; each county has such a board. After extensive study and review, and after significant public input has been received, LAFCO determines whether the remaining parties could be established with what is called “fiscal neutrality.” This means that any new city could operate without causing hardship to the areas from which it split.

Before 1977, if the Los Angeles County LAFCO approved the process, the public had the right to vote on detachment. If the area seeking detachment had been the Valley, then all registered Valley voters would have had a right to express their views at that time.

But this process was hijacked by the elected leaders in 1977, with the addition of veto power by the City Council over voters ever going to the ballot box. Now, if the Los Angeles City Council does not want you to vote, even though the other conditions have been met, eight council members can vote “no” and the issue effectively dies, without citizens ever casting their ballots.

The people against your right to vote have thrown up all kinds of smoke screens. First, they said The Right to Vote bill in the Assembly was only a Valley issue. That was proved wrong, and people from all over Los Angeles--Wilmington, Venice, South-Central, Eagle Rock and other areas--have joined together and formed an organization, the Alliance for Self-Determination, to restore this right.

The naysayers also say the right-to-vote issue is only a cover for the ultimate goal of secession. Let it be clear, the goal here is only one thing: better, more responsive government; government that provides more police protection, paves your roads, trims your trees, operates your public libraries, prevents and eliminates graffiti and remembers who is footing the bill.

In no way does this bill speak to secession. If the bill were altered, as some have proposed, to include a citywide vote, it would then introduce the issue of secession.

In the process described, the people who would vote are the ones in the proposed area, district or city to be established. If officials and bureaucrats against this bill were to succeed in adding a citywide vote requirement, they would alter the process unfairly and not truly give the right to vote back to citizens. Smaller areas of Los Angeles, such as Eagle Rock, would be forced to mount a citywide campaign. Their efforts would be dwarfed by the size and power of the City Council and members’ related interests. The fight would be virtually impossible to win, and citizens would again lose their rights.

Why are some local elected officials afraid of The Right to Vote bill? Why do they fear citizens’ having the right to go through this long, tedious process to detach? Might it be that given this particular right, citizens might actually want to leave the overblown, unresponsive government of the city of Los Angeles? Or might it be that it does not serve these elected officials’ best interests to have the vote in the hands of citizens instead of the City Council?

As has been proven time and again, we are better off having the voters decide such issues. We can handle the responsibility.